Bloodhound and Cadaver Dog Alerts Exculpated Steven Avery Yet Were Ignored

Joshua Radandt gave an affidavit, which was included in Kathleen Zellner's motion for post-conviction relief filed on June 7, 2017.

The following is part of Radandt's affidavit (when he says "later that week," he is talking about the week following Teresa's disappearance, and "later that week" would be November 10th or 11th, but not November 12th since that is the day the contents of "deer camp burn barrel #2" were processed):

I told the officers that I saw a fire, orange in color, when I was driving from the Radandt sand and gravel pit to the hunting camp on October 31, 2005, at approximately 5:00 p.m. I told the officers that I saw the fire from the direction of the Avery property. Because it was dark or getting dark when I saw the fire, I was not sure where exactly the fire was located. I did not observe any smoke coming from the fire.

The fire did not appear to be spread out and its flames appeared to be 2.5-3 feet in height. These characteristics were consistent with my personal knowledge of burn barrel fires. Because I observed these characteristics, I assumed the fire was contained in a burn barrel. I did not see whether the fire was actually contained in a burn barrel.

After I told them this information, the officers asked me to follow them by automobile over public highways to the business area of Avery's Auto Salvage, where law enforcement had a command post. There, I made a written statement at approximately 5:30 p.m.



Less than one week after I provided that written statement, two officers, who I believe were from the Wisconsin Department of Justice, met me at the hunting camp to discuss the fire I saw. I remember them asking me if I was sure that I saw what I said I saw. It seemed to me that they weren't satisfied with my statement about the fire. Specifically, it seemed to me that they wanted me to change my story to include a larger fire. Because they were reluctant to accept my story as true, I eventually asked them what they wanted me to say. They told me that all they wanted was the truth. I advised them that I had been telling the truth.

At that time, I was told by DOJ agents that they believed that Teresa Halbach's vehicle was driven to the Kuss Rd cul-de-sac by driving west through an empty field, then south down the gravel road past the hunting camp until reaching an intersection with a gravel road that ran northeast into the Avery property.

They told me that they believed Halbach's vehicle turned northeast onto the gravel road and entered the Avery property at its southwest corner. It is my understanding that this theory was based on the work of scent tracking dogs.

I also read and heard it from others that law enforcement stated that they believed that Teresa Halbach's vehicle was stored somewhere on Radandt's property before it was moved to the southeast corner of Avery property.

Later that week I received a call from law enforcement on my cell phone. Law enforcement asked me to unlock my three hunting trailers so they could be searched. I left work and drove to the hunting camp. When I arrived there was nobody there. I unlocked my trailers and left.

It is my understanding that they were searched by law enforcement and scent tracking dogs.

Later that day law enforcement called my phone again. They informed me they completed their search and I could use them again normally.

During the course of the conversation law enforcement informed me that they were going to collect the contents of the burn barrel at the hunting camp at a later time. When I returned to camp they had the area cordoned off surrounding the burn barrel and had officers to watch the burn barrel day and night on a rotating basis until its contents were collected.

A few days after November 5, 2005, I remember seeing light in the Manitowoc County sand and gravel pit to the south of Radandt's property. I remember that the lights appeared to illuminate the entire Manitowoc County pit.

I understand that there were suspected human pelvic bones recovered from a gravel pit property south of Avery's Auto Salvage. Upon reviewing a map showing the coordinates at which these bones were found, I believe they were found in the Manitowoc County sand and gravel pit.

Prior to November 5, 2005, the only permanent security measures in place to prevent access to the Radandt sand and gravel pit by trespassers were "Private Property" signs posted at all entrances. There were locking gates or cables at each access road, but they were rarely used.

Approximately one or two months before the start of Mr. Avery's criminal trial in 2007, I was summoned to the courthouse. At the courthouse, I was questioned again about my recollection of seeing a fire in the direction of the Avery property on October 31, 2005. I was not called as a witness to testify at Mr. Avery's criminal trial in 2007.

CASO deputy Gary Steier's interpretation of Joshua Radandt's statements.


Radandt's deer camp off of Kuss Road and the Radandt gravel pit. Loof's handler Sarah Fauske and Deputy Rick Reimer worked this area. "K9 Loof went west in a picked cornfield. Directly to the south was a gravel pit and in between the two was an area of brush and trees. K9 Loof worked this area with indications of very strong scent. K9 Loof worked west coming out to a cul-de-sac that was taped off with crime scene tape and two deputies were not allowing access. K9 Loof crossed the tape on one occasion and then was told not to go any further. The deputies phoned Sheriff Pagel to see if I could continue but were told to not allow anyone access at this time."

The following is a summary on the impact of Joshua Radandt's affidavit (credit to redditer 7-pair-of-panties):

1. LE knew that RAV4 was stored on Radandt's property before being moved.
2. LE knew the route that RAV4 took to get where it was found.
3. LE found the bones, maybe even burned them themselves, and protected them round the clock till they could be planted and re-found in/near Steven Avery's burn pit. Do we have pictures of any of either location? Oh yeah, never mind that!
4. We have bright lights in the Manitowoc county gravel pit, illuminating everything. Could someone have been picking the best, most identifiable bones for the planting? Oops, they dropped a few along the way! Don't worry, we'll just try to convince/strong arm the neighbor into saying the fire was MUCH bigger than it actually was, and we'll just leave a few random bones around his property so he'll be sure to cooperate with us.
5. After reading Radant's statement, this case goes straight to the top!
6. Thank you for the truth Joshua Radant! Wish there were more like you around there. So sorry you got wrapped up for so long in all this.

Zellner noted in her June 7, 2017 motion that "Mr. Radandt has been unfairly targeted as a possible suspect because he owned land adjacent to the Avery property." She also noted: "Current post-conviction counsel has interviewed Mr. Radandt on two occasions and has been accompanied by him twice to view all of his property. No evidence exists that implicates Mr. Radandt in the murder of Ms. Halbach, and he has a solid alibi for the afternoon of October 31st, 2005."

Zellner wrote in her June 7, 2017 motion that law enforcement pressured Joshua Radandt to describe the fire he observed on October 31st around 4:30 p.m. as a large fire behind Steven Avery's garage, in an open burn pit, even though in his written statement on November 5th Radandt described the fire as being in a burn barrel. Radandt stated:

I remember them asking me if I was sure that I saw what I said I saw. It seemed to me that they weren't satisfied with my statement about the fire. Specifically, it seemed to me that they wanted me to change my story to include a larger fire. Because they were reluctant to accept my story as true, I eventually asked them what they wanted me to say. They told me that all they wanted was the truth. I advised them that I had been telling the truth.

The following in from Zellner's June 7, 2017 motion for post-conviction relief, in the section labelled, "Trial Defense Counsel Failed to Investigate the Veracity of the Police Reports Regarding Joshua Radandt" (Radandt was on both the prosecution's and defense's witness lists but neither team called him to the stand).

When Mr. Radandt told investigators that he saw a fire on the Avery properly on October 31, 2005, he described the fire as appearing to be contained to a fifty-five gallon drum. When investigators re-interviewed Mr. Radandt on November 10, 2005, they pressured him to describe the fire as large, behind Mr. Avery's garage, and in an open burn pit. Mr. Radandt never told investigators that the fire was behind Mr. Avery's garage. Mr. Radandt sets forth in his affidavit that he remembers seeing the fire, contained to a burn barrel, and between several trailers on the Avery property.

Trial defense counsel failed to investigate Mr. Radandt's observation of a fire on the Avery property. Had trial defense counsel investigated Mr. Radandt, they would have learned that investigators had pressured Mr. Radandt to exaggerate the size of the fire, and he refused to do so. If trial defense counsel had called Mr. Radandt as a witness, his testimony would have demonstrated to the jury that the investigators knew Ms. Halbach's vehicle had been driven through his gravel pit and planted on Mr. Avery's property. The jury would also have learned of the efforts of the investigators to pressure Mr. Radandt to exaggerate the size of the fire.

Regarding the burn barrels, Zellner wrote on page 76 of the motion filed on June 7, 2017:

Bone fragments could not have actually been located in burn barrel no. two because this barrel had already been sifted by WSCL personnel on November 7, and no human bone fragments were discovered in this barrel or any of the barrels examined at that time. During their examination of barrel no. two on November 7, 2005, WSCL personnel used the same sifting apparatus that they later used to sift the burn pit behind Mr. Avery's garage. Suspiciously, the pieces of burned bone that were eventually found in barrel no. two were noticeably larger than the bone fragments from the burn pit. If bone fragments had been in burn barrel no. two when it was examined by Mr. Ertl and his team from the WSCL on November 7, 2005, the bone fragments would have been isolated by their sifting apparatus.

The area north of the Kuss Road cul-de-sac in the image above was a field in 2005, with a unpaved road that lead to the Avery property (see the field and the field road bordering the Avery property and Radandt quarry in the image below from November 2005).



The following is a report by Sarah Fauske, the handler for Loof the bloodhound, who, on November 5th, was tasked with tracking Teresa's scent (exhibit 46 of the motion for post-conviction relief filed on June 7, 2017).

Investigators would not allow Loof, with his handler Sarah Fauske and Deputy Rick Riemer, to cross the crime scene tape onto Kuss Road, the site of a possible burial site. Loof was "working this area with indications of very strong scent" when deputies, upon instructions from Sheriff Pagel, told Fauske and Riemer they were not allowed access.

After being spoken to by Sheriff Pagel, Deputy Sippel, Deputy Bowe and DCI agents, I explained my plamed areas of running tracks. My two areas of interest were where the vehicle was located on the south end of the property and the other being from the area that Teresa was last seen taking photographs of the van by the trailer of Steven Avery. Deputy Rick Riemer of the Calumet County Sheriff's Department was assigned to assist me on the tracks.

We walked down the driveway to the Avery property to the area where the van was sitting and for sale. I pre-scented K9 Loof and did a perimeter scent inventory. K9 Loof was harnessed, given the scent article of the insole [of Teresa's shoe] and given the command of "Find."

Having started approximately 50 feet east of the van, K9 Loof immediately went to the front portion of the van for sale. K9 Loof continued west going to a black F350 parked in the driveway in front of a garage. K9 Loof went to both doors of the truck. K9 Loof then went directly to the service door of the garage and worked her nose along the bottom of the actual overhead garage door, showing much interest.

K9 Loof worked west around the side of the garage but was unable to continue due to a large aggressive appearing German Shepard. K9 Loof wanted to continue around the garage.

K9 Loof went up to the south door of the trailer home. The door having a small porch entrance and the door was white in color. K9 Loof wanted to enter the home. K9 Loof continued north along the trailer and went between some pine trees and a burning barrel. K9 Loof smelled a charred area showing some interest then continued west.

K9 Loof went west in a picked cornfield. Directly to the south was a gravel pit and in between the two was an area of brush and trees. K9 Loof worked this area with indications of very strong scent. K9 Loof worked west coming out to a cul-de-sac [at the end of Kuss Road] that was taped off with crime scene tape and two deputies were not allowing access. K9 Loof crossed the tape on one occasion and then was told not to go any further. The deputies phoned Sheriff Pagel to see if I could continue but were told to not allow anyone access at this time.

K9 Loof was unharnessed and we waited for further instructions.

K9 Loof worked consistently as she does while working "strong scent."

Witnessed by Deputy Rick Riemer.

On 11/3, Avery attempted to unhitch a trailer and broke open a cut on the middle finger of his right hand. His finger was dripping blood as entered his trailer through the south door. He dripped blood on the floor as he entered the bathroom to find a piece of tape to put on the cut. He dripped blood onto the rim and basin of the sink and the bathroom floor. He did not wash away or wipe up the floor or sink because his brother Chuck was waiting for him to go to Menards in Manitowoc with him. He hastily wrapped his finger in masking tape and exited the trailer through the front door. Avery forgot to lock the south door on the front of the trailer. He did not clean the blood out of his sink prior to leaving the trailer at approximately 7:30 p.m. to go to Menards with his brother Chuck. The killer, observing the Avery property from a secluded spot off of the Kuss Road cul-de-sac, saw Avery leave. The killer entered Avery's trailer using the unlocked south entry door. The killer intended to steal something with Avery's DNA to put in Teresa's RAV4. The killer noticed fresh blood in Avery's bathroom sink. Having a background in science, the killer collected the blood and planted it in the RAV4.


Avery's backyard with above-ground pool: a raised berm lined by trees and brush (the berm, trees and brush are to the right of the pool) separates the backyard from Radandt's gravel pit (Avery's garage is at the top left of the photo) 


Maps of the track from the cul-de-sac at Kuss Road to the driveway of the deer camp, which continued on from the deer camp into the quarry. The entrance to the camp driveway juts out from the wide area of the cul-de-sac (below where the red line turns sharply in the bottom image and at the start of the yellow image in the top image). However, in the top image the red line is too far to the left; the yellow line is the track described in Joshua Radandt's affidavit. 

The following is a report from Great Lakes Search and Rescue Report, which was attached as an exhibit to Zellner's post-conviction petition.

GLSAR [Great Lakes Search and Rescue] members arrived on scene at the roadblock at CTH Q/Hwy 147 in Manitowoc County at 2:45 pm on November 5, responding to a page from Manitowoc County Sheriff's Dept.

At approximately 3:30 pm, one cadaver dog team was requested to proceed to the command post on the Avery salyage yard property. The dog selected was K9 Brutus, a 9-year old Belgian Malinois with extensive search experience and handler Julie Cramer with back up handler Bob Cramer.

Upon arrival at the command post, it was requested that K9 Brutus proceed into the salvage yard and check the area of a car crusher and vehicles located on the southeast corner of the property. 

Brutus checked the car crusher and numerous vehicles as he worked in a southernly direction. He turned to proceed west and gave a headcheck and rushed to a green vehicle [Teresa Halbach's RAV4], partially covered by blue tarp. 

He began to bark, which is his trained alert behavior, indicating the presence of human decomposition. (ALERT #1)

After investigators noted his response and identified the vehicle as belonging to the victim, we continued to work vehicles in the area.

Brutus showed interest along the berm south of the vehicle.

We proceeded into the gravel pit immediately south of the victim's SUV, and while he seemed agitated, no second alert was given in that area.

At the southern edge of that gravel pit, in the western corner along a road that ran along a gravel conveyor, K9 Brutus again began to bark. Several spent shell casings were noted in the area, but no scent source was located at that time (ALERT #2).

We continued around the gravel pit, returning to the area of the salvage yard, checked the pond area directly north of the victim's vehicle, rechecked the car crusher, and returned to command post.

At this time 4 teams: K9 Lucy, K9 Trace, K9 Rieseling and K9 Cody, were sent to begin checking vehicles in the salvage yard.

During this search, the four dog teams used the existing roads through the salvage yard to create grid patterns and did a specific vehicle checks of each vehicle their areas. Two teams reported an alert in the same area.

Both K9 Lucy and K9 Trace alerted in area of the salvage yard along the gravel conveyor in the southwestern section of the yard (ALERT #3). This area was north of the area of Alert 2. While both dogs alerted, no scent source was located at this time.

K9 Brutus was now re-assigned to check various specific areas/buildings with investigators. We first moved to the red mobile home, identified as Steven Avery's. We checked the interior of the residence. Brutus checked the bedroom area with increased interest, but no alert. He alerted in the bathroom/laundry room with his trained bark alert (ALERT #4). No source scent was visible at the time. No other interest inside the residence.

Moving outside, we checked an area with 4 burn barrels. K9 Brutus alerted on one of the barrels with extreme animation and excitement (ALERT #5). We moved east to numerous outbuildings and machine sheds, checking ATVs, diggers, front end loaders and trailers, as well as building interiors. K9 Brutus alerted on some car parts in the maintenance building (ALERT #6) and on a golf cart parked in a small building behind the main residence on the property (ALERT #7). Brutus then returned to the command post.

All GLSAR canine cleared the scene after completing these assignments.

It should be noted that on November 5 during the hours that the dog teams worked, the weather worsened. Heavy rains and darkness hampered attempts to locate the scent sources the dogs alerted on. All indications were reported to the command post, and law enforcement officers accompanied each GLSAR dog team.

On November 6 GLSAR mernbers arrived at the search scene at the Avery Salvage yard at 7:30 am, responding to a page from the Manitowoc Sheriff's Dept.

Initially 2 (HRD) cadaver dogs were given assignments.

Lucy was sent to check perimeters of building and structures in the compound. K9 Lucy showed increased interest in the area of a breezeway between a light green residence and garage, however, no alert was given.

K9 Brutus was sent to recheck the area of the car crusher and vehicles in the southeast corner of the salvage yard. Brutus alerted on 2 vehicles (ALERT #8) that were parked on the west side of the pond, north of where the victim's vehicle had been the previous evening. It appeared that blood in these 2 vehicles may have resulted from the event damaging the vehicles, however, both vehicles were flagged and rechecked by K9 Lucy.

Both Brutus and Lucy checked the pond in that area with no alerts. As we exited the salvage yard, Brutus alerted on the entrance to a mobile home along the gravel drive, identified as the home of Charles Avery (ALERT #9).

K9 Simon and K9 Cody were dispatched to check vehicles parked in fenced area west of the main salvage yard, along a gravel road that was west of Steven Avery's residence. Both dogs cleared their area with specific vehicle checks, neither reporting any alerts.

K9 Trace checked the exterior of Steven Avery's residence and red van in driveway without alert.

At this time 4 dog teams were sent to check the gravel pit immediately south of the salvage yard. 

K9 Lucy, K9 Trace, K9 Rieseling, K9 Simon set up a grid pattern to clear this area.

K9 Lucy reported an alert in the same area that the dogs had alerted the previous evening, labeled Alerts 2 and 3 (ALERT #10).

K9 Simon and K9 Lucy returned to cornmand post after completing the area of the gravel pit south of the salvage yard.

K9 Trace and K9 Reiseling proceeded to an area of 2 ponds west of the salvage yard, being searched by the Winnebago Dive team. These dogs cleared the quarry south of the ponds, and then returned to base, no alerts reported in this area.

The next area searched by GLSAR K9 was the gravel pit, east of Avery Road, north of the salvage yard. K9 Cody, K9 Simon, K9 Harley and K9 Kova gridded that quarry, working from south to north. An alert was reported in the center of the pit, along a sand pile, and marked with a tag (ALERT #11). This area was marked by K9 Kova and rechecked by K9 Simon and K9 Cody, both of whom showed interest....with K9 Cody alerting just north of that location.

Upon completion of these assignments, GLSAR handlers and teams from Midwest K9 cleared the scene after meeting with Lt. Brett Bowe at the Command Post.

Other canine with civilian handlers were on scene at this time.

On November 6, weather was again a factor working against the dogs. There was rain and sleet early in the day, with high winds. Dog handlers set up varied grid patterns to account for wind conditions. Alerts were reported to back up personnel and command post.









On Monday November 7, Julie and Bob Cramer responded to the scene with K9 Brutus and K9 Trace at the request of Investigator Dedering of the Calumet County Sherift's Dept.

We arrived on scene at 11:30 am and were asked to recheck the gravel piles east of Avery Road, where dogs had alerted the day before. K9 Brutus went over the area carefully but did not alert at the flagged location or in the area of that gravel pit.

We then proceeded to a location we were requested to check on Kuss Road, where a potential burial site had been located.

Upon arrival there K9 Brutus checked the area, and after passing the area upon entry in the wooded area, he gave a headcheck, returning to the location and gave his bark alert (ALERT #12) and seemed to be particularly interested in a shovel lying next to the disturbed earth.

We were cleared from that location, but returned a short time later to recheck the area. The shovel had been removed and was to be checked separately. Neither dog showed any interest on the shovel.

K9 Trace checked the wooded area first, and did not alert, but did show interest, increased animation and high headchecks. 

Upon returning to the area a second time, K9 Brutus again barked and alerted near the area of disturbed earth.

We then returned to the Command Post and were asked to re-check the trailer belonging to Charles Avery, where there had been an alert a day prior (ALERT #9). At the exterior of the home, Brutus again barked at the door and scratched to enter the residence. K9 Trace also barked at the front door. Once inside the trailer, K9 Brutus proceeded to check the interior, alerting inside a bedroom at the bed and a pile of clothing. He was very agitated but no sense source was noticed.

On this date, we were able to orient our alerts and summarize the work of the last 2 days on a large map in the command post. This provided a better overview for our team leadership on areas that needed additional coverage. We were also better able to provide appropriate resources for assignment.

On November 8, Julie Cramer with K9 Brutus and K9 Trace and Grace Salm with K9 Cody responded to the scene arriving at noon. We were dispatched to the Malle property on CTH Q just outside the village of Larrabee to check some ponds and a hunting club location. The 2 canine teams divided the area and worked a grid pattern, checking ponds, buildings and wooded areas with no alerts reported.

K9 Brutus was then sent to check the berm just west of Steven Avery's property. There was report of a suspicious looking pile of disturbed earth. Brutus showed no interest in pile, but did alert on a pile of brush and trash just west of the Avery residence (ALERT #13) and was very excited along the edge of the berm. This excitement continued as we proceeded south along this ridge and he carefully checked brushy areas west of the Avery yard and along the edge of the salvage yard. His behavior was noted by law enforcement personnel in the area, who indicated that mantrailing bloodhounds had also been interested in the same area.


We continued through the salvage yard, checking several vehicles as requested by State Patrol personnel. At 2 different vehicles K9 Brutus alerted, but material within the vehicle seemed reasonable for the dog's reaction. These were not marked further by this dog handler.

Upon returning to the command post, we met with the Bloodhound handlers on scene and it was noted that both live scent dogs and Human Remains detection dogs had shown excessive interest in the ridge of land beginning behind Steven Avery's residence and running south to the corner of the salvage yard, where gravel conveyor is located. This area seems to be of particular interest to the dogs although no scent source has been located in the area.

After this meeting GLSAR handlers cleared the scene for the day.

It should be noted that the Bloodhound handlers on scene are not part of Great Lakes Search and Rescue Canine, Inc.....nor have we any copies of their credentials or certifications, however, we worked with Judy Discher in the past and were familiar with her methods. We felt comfortable comparing notes and exchanging information with the hound handlers that was pertinent to the search.

On November 10, Bob and Julie Cramer returned to the Avery salvage yard with K9 Trace and K9 Brutus in response to a request by Lt. Hermann of the Calumet County Sheriff's Dept. 

We were asked to check a fenceline that ran east-west, west of Steven Avery's home. K9 Trace alerted on the first of 3 piles of disturbed earth located along this fenceline (ALERT #14). The rest of the fenceline was checked without alert.

We were then sent to the County Gravel pit, south of the Avery property. K9 Brutus was transported by ATV to that location where burn piles and fresh digs had been identified. We checked several areas in the gravel pit and fresh digs in the walls of the pit, without interest from the dog. Numerous shell casings and unspent bullets were observed.

In an area of large concrete slabs, several burn piles had been marked. K9 Brutus barked in two separate locations on this pile (ALERT #15). These locations were double flagged for identification, once the locations were logged/mapped for evidence. In both locations, Brutus barked and dug at the burned area in the concrete. 

We were transported back to command post after this assignment was complete.

We were dismissed from the scene at 4:30 pm.

At this time the command post did not have any further assignments for GLSAR canine and we cleared the scene, advising Calumet County officials that we would be available on our pager should any further assignments arise.

Conclusion: The conclusion drawn by the Cadaver Recovery/HRD dogs of Great Lakes Search and Rescue Canine, Inc on the Avery property, was that there were several locations on that property that were alerted to by the dogs and marked by handlers. It is our hope that these alerts will be useful in the conclusions of this missing person case.

At no time did any GLSAR handler attempt to collect or disturb evidence, but sirnply presented the alerts and indications of our dogs to the agencies in charge of this case.

A map is attached labeled with the 15 areas alerted by GLSAR dogs. Additional information or individual handler reports are available upon request.

Respectfully submitted,
Julie A Cramer, Training Director
Great Lakes Search and Rescue Canine, Inc.

Brutus‏ @cadaverdogbrutu
Pagel and his Kuss Road blockade...turns the true heroes away on the day...sniffer dogs. Unbelievable. #hownottorunalegitinvestigation

TickTockManitowoc @TManitowoc
Picture this scene: "Any sign of my missing Teresa?" "No sorry, Ms. Halbach...our sheriff blocked the search and rescue dogs from looking."

If Only Loof Had Been Given the Shoe of Prime Suspect, Ryan Hillegas, to Follow His Scent (and Steven Avery's Shoe as Well to Prove He Wasn't on Kuss Road, at Radandt's Deer Camp, or in Radandt's Gravel Pit)...

On Thursday, November 3rd, Allen Avery drove driven himself to the family's vacation property in Marinette County, which he did every Thursday, normally not returning to the Avery property in Manitowoc County until Tuesdays.

On Friday, November 4th, at about 7:30 p.m., Chuck Avery left his home on the Avery property, where he lived alone, and drove with Brendan Dassey to the family's vacation property in Marinette County for the weekend.

On Saturday, November 5th, Steven Avery, along with his mother Dolores and nephew Byran, drove up to the family's vacation property in Marinette County around 6 a.m.

This means that Allen and Dolores' trailer, Chuck's trailer, and Steven's trailer were unoccupied (Earl Avery's home was not on the Avery property). 

The only home on the Avery property that potentially was occupied after 6 a.m. on Saturday morning, November 5th, was Barb Janda's. Barb, Tom Janda and Bobby Dassey may have been home (Blaine drove up to Marinette County with Chuck on Friday, and Bryan drove up with Steven on Saturday). Barb's other son Blaine had spent Friday night at the home of one of his friend's, and he hadn't returned home by the time the Avery property was commandeered around 11 a.m. on Saturday, November 5th.

It was an established pattern for many members of the Avery family, including Steven and his parents, as well as Chuck Avery and some of the Dassey brothers, to spend the weekends in Marinette County. Allen Avery spent Thursday through Monday in Marinette County, returning to Avery Salvage Yard on Tuesdays. Chuck would drive up on Friday evenings like clockwork, and Steven would drive up on Friday or Saturday. Their mother Dolores would ride along with one of her sons.

If someone had been watching and waiting for the opportunity to plant the RAV4 on the Avery property, the best time to plant it on a Friday would have been after 7:30 p.m. However, to avoid detection, the ideal time would have been in the dead of night. Perhaps the framer's absence from home in the dead of night would have been noticed and considered unusual, so maybe he needed to accomplish this during a period of time when he normally would be out of the house; otherwise, it would have raised questions and concerns as to why he wasn't home, or why he arrived home, in the dead of the night.





The Pelvic Bone (Ilium)

The ilium -- it is the only piece of evidence that wasn't found by MTSO/CASO (found by a WI State Trooper?). It seemingly should've thrown a wrench in the whole case.

Available documents don't seem to indicate discovery of the quarry bone -- trial exhibit 113 or the CASO reports should have it. MTSO reports essentially cease on November 8.

Note: the quarry/Radandt's is referred to at times as a "gravel pit" and the salvage yard area of the Avery property is called "the pit" by family members.

There was a news clip that said that State Troopers were searching the quarry. I'm not sure which day. Maybe one of the troopers found the bones in the "quarry pile."

http://wbay.com/2016/01/07/video-nov-10-2005-halbach-case-becomes-a-homicide-investigation/

The mention of the quarry is at 2:20 to 2:40 mark -- LE putting red flags in a quarry on November 10.

The newscast specifically says that these troopers were putting out the red flags around the quarry "today," which was November 10.

If not November 10 in the video, it would have to be someone in one of those November 7 search groups -- group B or C or whatever -- since those don't seem to be anywhere in the MTSO reports. And Exhibit 113 that Austin prepared should indicate that as well.

November 7 discovery would make sense for the bones in Avery's pit to be found on November 8. Or perhaps a search party individual found them November 5.

Deputy Siders, page 13, mentions separate search groups on November 7. He was in Group A that went north, so maybe Group B or C searched that area? That would make sense if one of those groups found it. Odd thing is, he mentions Jost, but Jost doesn't seem to have any report filed for November 7.

Another interesting thing -- Jost talks about the burn pit having been dug out by a front-end loader. In the trial, there's also testimony of Radandt helping dig out silt ponds on the quarry property.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/MTSO-Summary-Report-on-Homicide-Investigation.pdf

The criminal complaint mentions the ilium, but nothing about it being discovered in the quarry -- deceptive wording -- the complaint gives the impression that the ilium was part of the burn pit fragments.

It's possible the troopers found the bones in the "quarry pile." And this is why the quarry was lighted (per Radandt's affidavit) -- to search it for more bones and other evidence.

In the trial testimony, there's discussion of searching the quarry property and digging out silt ponds on the Radandt property. Bowe is the witness (appears to be Evidence Tag No. 8675).

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-4-2007Feb15.pdf#page=61

From Eisenberg's testimony, it sounds like it is from Austin's report that she is aware of the bones and their location.

Austin apparently says Eisenberg gave him the location, and Eisenberg says the materials were given to her under that Evidence Tag.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-3-2007Feb14.pdf#page=155

Eisenberg testimony -- appears to be Evidence Tag No. 8675 and Exhibit 402 shows the location, and discovery would appear to be documented in a report by a Trooper Austin (Wisconsin State Trooper).

The Austin report is outside the scope of what's been requested thus far since he's not MTSO/CASO.

Looks like the ilium was found SW of the Avery property from the transcript. Hermann, page 9, mentions search party individuals to the SW on November 5 and telling them to leave.

On November 5 around 11 AM:

Indivduals were observed to the SW of the Avery Auto Salvage in a gravel pit area, near a gravel conveyer while officers were on the scene in the salvage yard. DI Schetter and (Lt. Todd Hermann) walked through the yard to the area where we made contact with five subjects: Kristy Hazaert, Jolene Bain, Sherry Lemerond, Aubrey Wygralak, and Trinity Rosenow. These subjects indicated they were friends of the Halbach family and were assisting with search efforts. "I identified the persons, and they were advised that, at this time, the salvage yard area is a secured area and they needed to leave the general area."

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/MTSO-Summary-Report-on-Homicide-Investigation.pdf

Eisenberg on direct says in early November of 2005 she was requested by CASO to examine some human remains that had been recovered; a voicemail was left November 9 from DCI [this would be the pelvic bone found on the burn pile at Radandt's quarry].

Conceivably it could've been found after DCI contacted her.

At trial, Eisenberg talks about being given the exhibit, and Austin says Eisenberg's team gave him the location? So who gave Eisenberg the bone and how did Eisenberg know the location?

The quarry bones don't seem to come up on direct exam. I guess they didn't want to talk about it.

They don't even seem to want to acknowledge that there were bones from a third site.

How does the defense even know that bones were discovered at the quarry? Where is that information? It had to be in discovery, probably a CASO report or in one of Austin's/Eisenberg's reports

The timeline:

(1) someone requests Marinette ask SA about fires/burning,
(2) Marinette asks SA on 11/6 regarding burning behavior,
(3) relays info back to requestor,
(4) attempted coordination with Radandt regarding his fire statement on 11/5,
(5) bones transferred on 11/7 to location consistent with Radandt's statement and not inconsistent with what SA told Marinette,
(6) bones discovered at Avery's on 11/8,
(7) MTSO pulls back after 11/8 to make investigation appear independent,
(8) Someone (Wisconsin State Trooper) discovers a bone fragment on November 8-10 that was inadvertently left on the quarry after MTSO pulled out, so that undesirably makes it into discovery.

Austin actually testified on Day 3 (starting on page 114).

I think the most interesting/important thing about this issue is that this information was not divulged at the trial. The trial had testimony from both the person who discovered TH's plates and the state trooper who gave him the plate number to verify that they were hers -- yet the history of the quarry bones seems shrouded in mystery.

The implication in Eisenberg's testimony seems to be she learned about the item and its location from Austin's report -- hard to believe that wouldn't describe either the discovery of the bones or who informed Austin of the discovery/location.

The prosecution case --- they don't call the person who informed them of the fire (Radandt) or the person that found the bones (Jost).

It suggests they didn't want the defense to cross-examine these people or ask them logically pertinent questions, so they didn't call them, and they kept direct exam narrower than would otherwise be expected.

Often, you get the sense their objections seem almost nervous -- things that seem insignificant -- the way the prosecution seems to act overly defensive about it seems odd.

Perhaps the dogs led them to the quarry.

http://imgur.com/a/mznGs

Above is a look at the location of the GPS coordinates given in Exhibit 402 of where pelvic bones (sacrum and innominate fragments) were found in the quarry and later examined by forensic anthropologists Leslie Eisenberg AND Dr. Kenneth Bennett (ilium bone is innominate).

The 2005 Aerial Image Layer is selected so the imagery reflects the area.

The red outlines parcels owned by Manitowoc County (seen on side and bottom) and run by the County Highway Department, which has since rented the land to store wind tower parts as evidenced in current aerial imagery.

The small blue dots represent the 44N 15' 51" and 87W 41' 51" GPS coordinates (as seen in the top right corner showing the Lat/Long coordinates), the location of the "quarry" pile per Exhibit 402.

The ilium bone was from the quarry, per page 3 of Criminal Complaint:

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Criminal-Complaint.pdf

It is the only bone fragments with pelvic features. The iliac crest part of the ilium bone are under Evidence Tag 8675, which are associated to the "quarry burn pile" in the CASO Evidence Log. It is interesting that they exhibit cut marks just as the bones that came from the Janda burn barrel exhibited cut marks, according to Exhibit 401.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Trial-Exhibit-401-Eisenberg-Pics-of-Cut-Marks-on-Halbach-Remains.pdf

I just tried to ctrl+F the CASO report and it doesn't seem finding of tag 8675 is really documented at all. There is reference to something found on a "Michels Materials Quarry." Suspected human foot found on November 10 in quarry south of Avery Road (p. 219). I didn't find any mention of the quarry pelvic bones doing a quick search of "quarry."

Yeah I didn't find anything using pelvic, iliac, Radandt or Michels. Also tried debris pile, which is common in the documentation.

Tried gravel pit -- they use that as much as quarry. Can't find anything relevant with "gravel" search. The good news is that we're caught up with the CASO report with respect to the pelvic bones from the quarry pile! The bad news is that they're more mysterious than ever.

I just can't believe the evidence tag only comes up a handful of times, with no indication of when or where it was found, so then how did Eisenberg or Austin know?

● Some of Teresa's bones were found in the gravel pit
● Badgerland Aggregates and Manitowoc County own the land
● Badgerland is owned by Radandt and Jeff Maples
● Jeff maples is also owner of Vinton Construction
● Vinton Construction = $200,000,000 state contract bid scam from 1996-2004 on trial in 2005
● Doug Haag is the DA's mentor
● Doug Haag is also currently the head of the real estate transfers and registry in that part of the state.
● Emerging Energies kept getting shut down by the residents of Mishicot in 2004-2005 to develop Wind Turbines around the county (the county of Manitowoc was strongly present and pushing for the wind turbines)
● The problem at the time was wind turbines need to be 1000 feet from all property lines, and the gravel pit would be continuous with the Avery property

The criminal complaint mentions the ilium, but there isn't anything about a quarry discovery. Deceptive wording in the complaint gives the impression that the ilium was part of the burn pit fragments.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Criminal-Complaint.pdf#page=3

Judge Willis wasn't that interested in a third burn site.

THE COURT: Mr. Strang, can you, uh, let me know about how long this line of questioning will go?

I don't think they would bury her because cadaver dogs would have found her, so why go through that effort. I think he left her in the back of the RAV4, parked it in the woods between Kuss Road and the deer camp, and spend the night at the deer camp, leaving before dawn.

When she was not reported missing the next day, he waited until dark and retrieved the vehicle, having kept her set of keys. He drove it to an area more secluded but still at Radandt's quarry, and burned her in a gravel mound.

He placed her body under the chunks of concrete in the gravel mound. Then he doused the body with a super combustible liquid and lite a match. The explosion would have driven the body up against the chunks of concrete, breaking every done in the body. Then he would have been able to break it up into small pieces easily, rather than have to cut through bones.

Or a barrel taken from the deer camp could generate the 1600 degree's necessary to reduce the body to bones. Then they moved the barrel containing the bones to Avery's and dumped it in the pit.

http://www.sott.net/article/185067-Body-burners-The-forensics-of-fire

My interest in the bones was renewed by that mysterious footage at the end of the flyover video. So if anyone has a source for who discovered the quarry bones...

From what I recall from the aerials, the quarry burn site was south and east of the "smoke" seen on the flyover video, but not by some huge distance. If it was about 1000 feet from the hunting camp to Avery's trailer, and the distance from the smoke to the quarry remains area was less than 150 feet.

There's no documentation available about who discovered the quarry bones, or when they were discovered, or precisely where.

No one knows or at least no one actually admitted during the trial. Defense closing statements even mentions how it's a mystery.

I've never felt like I needed details on who discovered the quarry burn site because it is so blatantly clear that it was someone NOT connected to all the crooked framing crew (i.e. a member of the public or other LE), and they all preferred to not draw any attention to it because it so obviously flags how the framing was carried out. It was inconvenient evidence they never wanted connected to the case so I'm sure there is next to no proper record of how the evidence came to be submitted.

On November 8 they announced they found bones behind Avery's in the burn pit when the only bone identified that day as being human and female was the ilium bone. The only thing that appears to be an ilium is from the quarry. Eisenberg never finds an ilium. If she would admit the bones in the quarry were human then the defense could tie it in with the ilium and they could say, "Oh, so human bones were AT the QUARRY?"

And as far as I know, this ilium has disappeared. No testing was done on it... which is interesting. Supposedly it was taken to Bennett at his home on November 8. If it was in such good shape he could suggest a young adult female, it might have been a good candidate for mtDNA testing (what is done with burnt bones). Most of the others were in too bad of shape to get decent DNA.

Ken Bennett: he positively ID the Ilium (pelvis) on November 8, and it was not only human but female. This was the day the bones were found. And because of the positive ID, law enforcement were able to arrest Avery at this point since the bone was found on his property. The only problem is there are no ilium bones noted by Eisenberg in evidence at the burn pit on Steven’s property. The only thing that even resembles an ilium is at the quarry.

Dr. Eisenberg also says she identified the gender with facial bone fragments from Avery's burn pit. The reason she couldn’t use the pelvis is because this bone was now recorded in evidence as being at the quarry!

Why do you think it was such a big deal during trial that the state insist that Eisenberg doesn’t know if the pelvis like bone/ilium isn’t human? Because it would prove the bones that were positively ID as being female and human (per Dr. Bennett on November 8) were not on Steven Avery’s property but in the quarry!

The fact that all the charred human bones indicated they came from the same skeleton and the same burn pile pretty much proves they came from one place, and if you trust the evidence that would be in the quarry where the pelvis/ilium was found!

LE needed the bones to be on Avery’s property to get the ball rolling by November 10, before the big scheduled depositions.

November 7

When: 6:59 a.m. until 7:10 a.m.

Circumstances: Radandt's third consecutive day of visiting the secured crime scene. Schetter, third in command at the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department, was one of the highest-ranking officials at the scene when Radandt came by. Minutes after the quarry operator left, a large contingent of Manitowoc sheriff's deputies arrived for their shift, including Lenk, Colborn, Detective Dennis Jacobs, Lt. Todd Hermann, and Schetter's predecessor, Mike Bushman, who had recently retired but remained as a part-time reserve deputy.

Zellner filing: Radandt "accessed the property from the quarry four times, for some unknown reason, after it had been closed to the public. (Radandt) accessed the property within minutes of Officers Colborn and Lenk on November 5 and twice on November 7 ... Mr. Avery is requesting DNA testing on the burnt material found at the Radandt deer hunting camp west of the Avery Salvage Yard to determine whether there are any items of evidentiary value at the deer camp."

When: 9:03 a.m. to 9:53 a.m.

Circumstances: Hillegas and Bloedorn, who came from 40 minutes away, spent nearly an hour at the secured scene. That morning, Bushman agreed to lead a four-member evidence search party of fellow Manitowoc sheriff's deputies. Deputy Dave Siders later testified he came across Avery's burn barrel and removed a heavy metal tire rim from inside. Remnants of a Motorola emblem for a cellphone and debris from a camera were identified. Authorities insisted the charred debris was Halbach's camera and cellphone.

Zellner filing: "There are conflicting dates (Nov. 5 and Nov. 7) about law enforcement's discovery of the remnants of Ms. Halbach's Motorola Razr cell phone, Palm Pilot and camera in a burn barrel in Mr. Avery's yard. No mention was made at trial about the second Motorola cell phone taken from Ms. Halbach's home on November 3, 2005 ... Mr. Avery is requesting to examine items described as a Motorola Razr phone and box from the victim's dining room ... The inability of the State to produce the Motorola phone located in the victim's residence would demonstrate that it was the phone placed in the burn barrel by law enforcement."

When: 11:51 a.m. until 12:29 p.m.

Circumstances: Radandt returned to the crime scene for the second time that morning. He came by shortly after Colborn, Lenk and Calumet Sgt. Bill Tyson finished walking through the sprawling salvage yard, apparently to check for vehicles that were overlooked the day before.

When: Time unknown until 4:28 p.m.

Circumstances: Hillegas and Bloedorn both signed out at 4:28 p.m., but there was no sign-in log for either of them. Their continued presence around Avery Road preceded some of the biggest developments in the investigation. The next morning, November 8, Halbach's license plates were discovered inside a junked Mercury station wagon that had broken windows; and Colborn and Lenk rechecked Avery's bedroom and produced a spare key for Halbach's vehicle. Sheriff's Sgt. Jason Jost found a large vertebrae and another human bone near Avery's burn pile pit.

Zellner's filing: Has accused Hillegas of using a false name that day to help authorities search near one of the gravel pits. Zellner furnished a notebook sheet written and signed by the "Ryan Kilgus Group." Zellner also revealed Hillegas "received approximately 22 calls from law enforcement on November 4, 2005 prior to the victim's vehicle being moved onto the property."

November 8

When: 6:41 p.m. until 7:07 p.m.

Circumstances: Hours after Jost noticed the human bones near Avery's burn pit, Hillegas and Bloedorn were back at the crime scene after dark. Logs show they stayed nearly a half-hour. Meanwhile, authorities decided not to summon Manitowoc County Coroner Deb Kakatsch. No crime-scene photos or videos were taken to document the discovery of the human bones. The following day, Avery was arrested. His $36 million wrongful conviction lawsuit against Manitowoc County and ex-sheriff Tom Kocourek imploded.

Zellner filing: Points out that most of Halbach's bones and 29 of her teeth were absent from Avery's burn pit — raising doubt about how and where Halbach actually died. Zellner has asked for DNA testing on the human pelvic bones that were recovered that week from one of the adjacent quarries. These were clues that Kratz chose to downplay at Avery's murder trial.

November 9-12, 2005

After Avery's arrest, Radandt, Hillegas and Bloedorn made no more visits to the secured crime scene, sign-in logs indicate.

http://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/investigations/2016/10/02/crime-scenes-off-limits-except-halbach-case/91112372/






Testimony of Manitowoc County Coroner Debra Kakatsch

Kakatsch was barred from the scene and threatened with arrest even though, by State law, she was required to be there, and she had authority over the DA and LEOs barring her from the scene.

Pages 197-221

DEBRA KAKATSCH,
called as a witness herein, having been first duly
sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
THE CLERK: Please be seated. Please state
your name and spell your last name for the record.
THE WITNESS: My name is Debra Kakatsch,
and it's spelled D-e-b-r-a, and the last name is
K-a-k-a-t-s-c-h.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
 BY ATTORNEY STRANG:
Q Good afternoon.
A Good afternoon.
Q How are you employed, Ms. Kakatsch?
A I'm employed as the Manitowoc County Coroner.
Q How long have you been the Manitowoc County
Coroner?
A Uh, I'm going into my 15th year and, also, I was, uh,
chief deputy two years before that.
Q So what -- what does that mean you started?
A As coroner?
Q Or as chief deputy?
A Uh, chief deputy, '91-'92. Coroner started '93.
Q Okay. What -- what sort of, um, work background
did you have before becoming the chief deputy
coroner?
A Um, my background was primarily nursing at that time.
I worked in several different areas. I was an
obstetrical nurse and delivered babies. Sometimes
doctor always didn't get there. Uh, also worked in a
nursing home, taught childbirth education. Uh,
chemotherapy. Worked in the emergency room. Uh,
intensive care area.
Q Um, when you first started nursing, what sort of
nursing certification, if any, did you have?
A In the beginning --
Q Yes.
A -- of my nursing career? Uh, I became, um, certified
in obstetrics in my earlier years.
Q And was -- I know there are different types of
nursing and just different certifications. Did
you have any of those initially?
A Well, uh, to be a nurse, you need to have a license
under the state of Wisconsin. Um, but then I went on
to be certified in other areas.
Q What was your first license as a nurse?
A Licensed Practical Nurse.
Q Did you continue your education in the field of
nursing after becoming a licensed practical --
practical nurse?
A Yes, I went back to school for a registered nurse.
Q And did you eventually get the RN?
A Yes, I did.
Q Or registered nurse?
A Yes, I did, 1980.
Q Do you have any schooling beyond the registered
nurse, uh, status?
A Yes, I do.
Q What's that?
A Um, I went back to school and, uh, I got a Bachelor's
Degree in management. And then I also went back to
school for a paralegal degree. And then I went back
to school for, uh, a police science degree. Not a
full degree, but at that time I was looking for, um,
more classes to help me do my job as a, uh, coroner
and also in other fields that I was pursuing later
on. But, uh, it helped me quite a bit in, um, my
coroner work. And -- and by doing that I got
involved in teaching some things, too.
Q Have you had any spec -- any training specific to
your work as the, uh, coroner?
A Yes, I have. Um, I have taken, uh, numerous other
trainings, um, such as, uh, anthropology,
autopsy-type, um, courses. I've been in a number of
autopsies, signed permits for a number of those. Um,
oh, DNA. I've taken a couple of Dr. Henry Lee's
courses. I don't know if you're familiar with him.
Um, Dr. Michael Bodden. I've taken some courses from
Dr. --
Q These --
A -- Bodden.
Q These are well-known medical examiners --
A Yeah.
Q -- from --
A Yes.
Q -- Connecticut in Dr. Lee's case, um, and
Pennsylvania in Dr. Bodden's case?
A Yes.
Q Okay.
A Um, and I felt I -- I learned a lot specifically from
getting training from those particular people. So,
um, then I try to keep on that -- keep up on that
training, uh, every year with whatever comes along
that best fits the scope of my job to do it better.
Q Do you have any certifications, um, connected to
your work as coroner?
A Yes, I do. I'm certified as a forensic nurse.
Q What does that mean?
A Forensic nurse deals more with the -- the
investigation part of nursing and the medical field,
and, uh, to do that I had to submit numerous types of
educational things that I attended, and, then, uh, I
also had to take an advanced condensed program and
then write an exam.
Q Okay. Uh, and other than forensic nursing, um,
have we covered your certifications?
A I also got certification as, um, Homeland Security,
which deals with, uh, the medical field death
investigation, disaster-type situations, death
investigations.
Q When you say, "Homeland Security", the United
States Department of Homeland Security?
A Uh, well, it's through our organization, the American
College of Forensic Examiners, so --
Q All right. Um, in addition to the American
College of Forensic Examiners, do you belong to
any professional associations?
A Yes. I belong to the Wisconsin Coroners Medical
Examiners Association, the Forensic Nurses
Association. I used to belong to the Homicide
Investigators Association.
Q All right. Now, what -- what is the position of
coroner, um, in, uh -- in Wisconsin?
A In Wisconsin it, uh, revolves around death
investigations and it can -- the types of deaths we
get involved in are, um, homicides, suicides, traffic
accidents, industrial deaths. Um, sometimes if there
would be a, uh, death in police custody or in jail,
or bodies found, remains found, um, drug deaths,
emergency room deaths, drug reactions. There's many
things we get involved in that the State requires us
to investigate.
Q All of them in -- involve, unfortunately, someone
dying?
A Yes.
Q Okay. And how do you -- how do you -- how do you
get this job of coroner?
A Coroner's elected.
Q What -- what's the current term?
A The current term is four-year term now. It -- it had
been two years.
Q Okay. And, uh, when you say "elected" is that
a -- a municipal position? A county position? A
state position? What --
A It's a county position.
Q All right. Um, does -- does your work as
coroner, uh, involve a duty to determine manner
of death? Uh, at least in some instances of a
sudden death?
A Well, that's our job everyday.
Q Now, but -- but if a death happens, let's say, in
a hospital or a nursing home, would you be
involved, typically, in that?
A Sometimes we are. It depends. Um, let's say, for
example, a person has a hip fracture and they're in
the nursing home, those we have to accept as a case.
If someone's choked, if someone's had a drug
reaction, we have to accept those as case as well.
Q So how would we -- how would we describe simply
for the jury what sort of deaths become the
coroner's business and what don't?
A Well, it -- it would fit under the criteria of what I
explained. If there's some kind of accidental
nature, suicide nature, homicide nature to it, um,
undetermined nature, um, we have to get involved.
Q Okay. In other words, if it's -- if -- if it's
natural causes, you might not be involved?
A We may still be involved because you may not know the
death is a natural death until you completed whatever
you need to do to arrive at that determination.
Q Okay. But, I guess, if I understand you, you
won't be involved in every natural death if a
doctor has attended --
A No. No.
Q Okay. Um, do you have the -- the power to sign
and issue a death certificate?
A That's our job everyday, yes.
Q Do you have any statutory or, you know, duties
under law, to, um, uh, control the disposition of
human remains?
A Yes.
Q What -- what are those?
A Um, well, particularly where I get involved, um, with
disposition is unclaimed bodies, bodies that are not
identified. We have to provide indigent burial if we
don't find anybody to claim that body.
Q All right. Did you, um, in November of 2005, uh,
come to learn of some suspected human bones found
on or near what we call the Avery property in
Manitowoc County?
A Yes, I did.
Q How did you learn about that?
A From television.
Q And, um, had you had any -- any prior involvement
in the investigation into Teresa Halbach's
disappearance?
A Could you repeat that?
Q Had you -- Before you saw this on the
television --
A Uh-huh.
Q -- did you have any prior involvement into the
investigation of Teresa Halbach's --
A No.
Q -- disappearance? Okay. Um, but, again, I
guess, it would be a death that would trigger the
coroner's involvement?
A Yes.
Q What did you do after you saw on television, uh,
something about the discovery of possible human
remains?
A Well, I got a few phone calls, uh, and particularly
from my deputies, as to what the plan of action would
be when --
Q Okay. I'm going to interrupt you just a moment.
I'm sorry. How many deputy coroners do you have?
A Uh, at that time I believe it was six.
Q Okay. I'm sorry I -- I interrupted.
ATTORNEY GAHN: Your Honor, I -- I'm --
I'm sorry, Your Honor. I think we need to be
heard outside the presence of the jury.
THE COURT: All right. At this time the
Court will excuse the jurors for a few minutes.
(Jurors out at 4:08 p.m.)
THE COURT: You may be seated.
ATTORNEY GAHN: I believe it would be
better if the witness were to leave the
courtroom.
THE COURT: All right. Ms. Kakatsch, we'll
excuse you from the courtroom at this time.
Mr. Gahn?
ATTORNEY GAHN: Yes, um, I guess we're
at a loss here. We don't know what is going --
happening here. We've received no discovery. I
see that the witness has a folder in front of
her. Um, looks like two folders. Um, I don't
know if she's going to be asked to render any
type of opinion. I don't know if this is --
involves the lawsuit that was pending at the
time.
But, more importantly, on, um, just
January 19 of 2007, uh, one of our agents,
Special Agent Heimerl, um, spoke with the
coroner, and at that point she stated that, uh,
she was not aware of being on the list as a
potential defense witness. She stated she did
not know why she would be called as a witness.
She stated that she does not know what type of
testimony may be needed from her as a defense
witness as she felt she had no relevant
information.
So I guess, under the rules of
discovery, we would like to know exactly what
documents the defense has, what they plan to
elicit from this witness. Uh, we just, um, have
no idea.
THE COURT: Mr. Strang?
ATTORNEY STRANG: I have no documents
from the witness. Never have. Um, because she
brought the files, I asked her to bring them in,
anticipating that maybe the State would want to
see them. Um, there's no discovery I have that's
to be turned over. She is not an expert witness.
She's purely a fact witness.
I understand I -- I asked some questions
about her background, but simply by way of
establishing who she is and why she has the job
of coroner. She was, of course, listed on our
witness list, uh, timely filed. Um, and, um, I
guess they could have interviewed -- they could
have interviewed her, um, as I have.
Um, she will, um, testify, um, to the
response that she began, in her capacity as the
Manitowoc County Coroner, um, in her efforts,
then, to obtain access to human remains, uh, how
those were rebuffed by, um -- specifically by
Investigator Mark Wiegert, as the person with
whom she recalls having contact, um, and then she
was later, um, told that, uh, she was not to get
involved, um, by the unusual, she will say,
intervention of the Manitowoc County Executive
and, later, the Corporation Counsel. Uh, and in
the end, she was prevented from discharging her
statutory duties as coroner.
ATTORNEY GAHN: And I would ask what is
the relevancy of this? Um, the Manitowoc County
Corporation Counsel, is my understanding, wanted
to remove all Manitowoc County officials from
this investigation. Um, it was a prudent, wise
move on their part.
And to come in now, because, perhaps,
some disgruntled Manitowoc County employee, uh,
didn't like that decision? I don't see the
relevancy at all in this.
ATTORNEY STRANG: Well, it probably
would have been prudent to remove all Manitowoc
County officials from the investigation. But
we've heard for a month just exactly how that
wasn't done with the Manitowoc County Sheriff's
Department. And, unlike the Sheriff's
Department, neither Ms. Kakatsch, nor the office
of coroner, nor anyone in the coroner's office,
had any prior involvement in Steven Avery's civil
lawsuit. Um, hadn't been deposed, hadn't been
interviewed, had no statutory responsibilities
for the 1985 crime.
And, um, yet, her office alone,
apparently, among Manitowoc County law
enforcement offices, uh, was walled off entirely,
uh, from performing, uh, legal duties, lawful
duties in connection with discovery of human
remains.
THE COURT: Assuming she was walled off,
what's the relevance of that for purposes of this
trial?
ATTORNEY STRANG: This -- this goes
directly to investigative bias and decisions to
prefer the involvement of certain Manitowoc
County officials and not other Manitowoc County
officials even when there were statutory duties,
uh, to be performed in connection with a death.
ATTORNEY GAHN: Your Honor, now, I
guess, the Corporation Counsel of Manitowoc
County is involved in the bias in this case. Um,
I don't see any relevance at all. But if -- if
Your Honor sees some shred of, uh, relevance,
then I would ask the Court to give a, um,
analysis under 904.03 as this is just, uh -- the
probative value is just so low that it just, um,
is outweighed by the, uh -- the prejudice this
could cause, the confusion of issues with the
jury, and -- and waste of time for the jury also.
ATTORNEY STRANG: Well, if there's -- if
there's any 9-0-4-0-3 concern, I guess that would
um -- and turning to the Milwaukee County Medical
Examiner a year after this death, uh, when he had
no involvement at the scene, uh, rather than
having the local official whose job it was to
investigate a suspicious death, to sign a death
certificate, to determine manner of death, the
State -- the State's put all of that, uh, in play
with Dr. Jentzen and even trying to use an
anthropologist for that. Here's the official
under Wisconsin law whose duty it is to do
exactly these things, and in her county she was
prevented from discharging that duty.
THE COURT: What -- what would be her
competence to perform this duty considering the
other plain state people that we've heard from?
ATTORNEY STRANG: Well, unlike the
State, she will testify that she immediately
contacted a forensic pathologist with whom she's
worked before and immediately contacted a
forensic anthropologist with whom she's worked
before, and told them, come to the scene. We've
got work to do at the scene, uh, there, as part
of a death investigation.
But there, again, relevance in how the
recovery of bones could have been done so that a
more useful assessment of -- of where the body
was burned, uh, where remains were found and how
they were distributed might have been done had
she been allowed to do her job.
THE COURT: Well, this may be relevant or
have probative value as it relates to a turf war,
but I -- I'm failing to see the -- the probative
value of it for purposes of this case. I think it
has much more potential to mislead the jury, um, and
I -- I don't see how anything the coroner would have
done, um, would have somehow contributed to a less
biased investigation in this matter.
ATTORNEY STRANG: Well, I think
preferring one Manitowoc County office to another
Manitowoc County office in itself, here, Your
Honor, bears on investigative bias. It goes
directly to the issue of consistency, if you
will, and inconsistency that reflects a
particular bias. This jury is entitled to see it
and, uh, rule upon.
THE COURT: I've already given the defense
quite a bit of latitude. I've allowed reference to
the lawsuit, uh, the fact that, uh, Lenk and
Colborn, uh, gave their depositions. I think the
Court has granted the defendants, uh, adequate means
to make the point as it relates to bias.
But the, um -- this witness has nothing
to do with the Sheriff's Department. The
decisions of Manitowoc County officials, uh, not
to become involved that started with the, um --
the district attorney, and, uh, whether Manitowoc
County higher officials made the right decision
or the wrong decision, for purposes of this
criminal case, uh, I fail to see any measurable
probative value and I think the State's objection
is well taken.
ATTORNEY STRANG: I think there's also
probative value more narrowly in showing this
jury that a forensic anthropologist could have
been there, could have been at the scene and
involved in the recovery, um, had the law
enforcement people followed the usual lawful
routine of notifying the county coroner upon
discovery of suspected human remains. Um, that
could have happened here, and the normal steps
contemplated by Wisconsin Statutes been taken
here.
Um, so I would -- I would tender, uh,
that as relevant, uh, as well, uh, Your Honor.
Uh, there will be testimony in the defense case
about, um, destruction of bodies by thermal
injury or cremation, uh, about what could have
been learned if this site had been properly
preserved and recovered, and this is, uh,
foundation in part for that testimony as well.
THE COURT: Well, if we hear some testimony
from a defense expert that creates some relevance
I'm not aware of right now, Ms. Kakatsch could
always, I suppose, be recalled. But, again, uh,
if -- if the reason that the coroner was told to
stay off the case was because of fear of a conflict,
uh, whether there was any or not, um, I -- I -- I
don't believe that the -- the probative value of
such evidence, uh, is very great.
And I'm -- I'm more worried about
creating confusion for the jury when I think the
real issue, as -- as I understand it, on the bias
issue from the defense has been the, uh, bias,
specifically, of Officers Lenk and Colborn, and I
think the Court has, uh, allowed, uh, the defense
to present a great deal of evidence with regard
to that issue.
Uh, but I think to further bring the
coroner involved, I -- I -- I just think, uh,
it's too dangerous to confuse issues when weighed
against -- against the probative value.
ATTORNEY STRANG: I understand the
Court's ruling. I -- I respectfully, uh, suggest
that the bias of any witness called by the State
is a relevant area of exploration. It's not
collateral to the issue and, specifically, this
would be -- this witness had telephonic contact,
she will say, with Investigator Mark Wiegert, uh,
who's been identified as one of the two lead
investigators on the case and who testified, um,
yesterday.
So -- but -- but, again, I -- I -- I
recognize the rulings that the Court has made and
the rulings allowed us on the bias of Mr. Lenk
and Mr. Colborn, but the bias of any state
witness is relevant, particularly somebody who
has a role like Mr. Wiegert, uh, did here.
Um, if -- if -- if the Court's ruling is
to stand, what I would simply propose to do is to
make a verbal, uh, offer of proof. Proffer her
testimony. I can do that in three or four or
five minutes just by running through my -- the
outline for my direct examination.
THE COURT: Anything from the State?
ATTORNEY GAHN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Well, I -- I -- Maybe I'm
missing something. I don't recall any questioning
about Ms. uh -- Detective Wiegert in this regard.
I'm -- I'm only basing my ruling on what I know. If
you want to put something on the record as to what
you, uh, would intend to prove, and if, uh, further
witnesses from the -- the defense, uh, believes you
should ask the Court to reconsider its decision, I
will. I'm making my decision based on what I know
now.
ATTORNEY STRANG: Well, and I'll -- I'll
make an offer of proof of what I would expect to
elicit from Ms. Kakatsch.
THE COURT: Go ahead.
ATTORNEY STRANG: Um, I left off with
asking her, essentially, how did she learn that
suspected human bones, uh, had been discovered on
the Avery property. She said she learned by
television.
Uh, she -- I would -- I expect that she
would then testify that her response was to talk
to one or more of her deputy coroners. That she
then called, um, a forensic pathologist named
Dr. Doug Kelly, who at that time worked, uh,
with -- although she's not sure -- he was
actually employed by the Waukesha County Medical
Examiner's Office. He's no longer there. I
believe he's the Fond du Lac County Medical
Examiner today.
Um, she also asked Dr. Kelly to arrange
the services of Patrick J. Schoebel,
S-c-h-o-e-b-e-l, whom she refers to as P.J., uh,
a forensic anthropologist with whom she had
worked in the past.
I further expect that she would testify
that she then contacted, um, investigators at the
scene, um, asked why she had not been called.
Um, made arrangements to come to the scene, uh,
on the 9th of November. Uh, was put off, um, in
two or three telephone conversations with
Mr. Wiegert. First told, essentially, that he
had to check. Uh, next told that her services
weren't needed.
Um, she has notes that document those
conversations. And I'm just giving the general
gist of them. Uh, she was not, in the end,
allowed on the scene. Uh, she did not have a
chance to determine the cause or the manner of
death. Um, to her knowledge, neither Dr. Doug
Kelly nor Patrick J. Schoebel, um, reported to
the scene.
She did receive, on the 9th or 10th of
November, a phone call from Dan Fischer, who she
identifies as the County Executive of Manitowoc
County, uh, telling her, in essence, that there
was a conflict of interest and she ought not push
to be involved.
Uh, she disagreed with that. She would
say that it was very unusual for her to get a
phone call from the County Executive at all. She
later received a phone call from a -- from a
Steven Rollins, the Manitowoc County Corporation
Counsel. Actually, who I -- I know has written
the Court here on this case recently. Uh, he,
too, advised that she should not be involved
because of a conflict.
She protested that she and her office
had nothing to do with the civil lawsuit that
Mr. Avery had brought. Had no involvement in it
whatsoever, um, but realized that she was meeting
firm resistance.
And she, then, contacted the Calumet
County, uh, Medical Examiner. I believe he is in
Calumet County. A gentleman named -- she would
say his name, Mike Klaser. I think that's
K-l-a-s-e-r. She contacted him just because
somebody had to fulfill the obligations of the
coroner. And, as a matter of good faith and
doing what she could to discharge her duties, um,
she thought the next best thing she could do was
to contact the medical examiner in the county
that employed the, um, uh, investigator from the
Sheriff's Department with whom she was having,
uh, contact.
And, finally, she would explain that she
had no involvement at anytime with Steven Avery's
civil lawsuit. She wasn't deposed. She wasn't
interviewed by either side. So nobody had any
contact with her at all, um, in relation to the,
uh, civil lawsuit against Manitowoc County.
So that's, uh -- that's, in a nutshell,
or in -- in skeleton form, the, uh, testimony I
expect that she could offer and that I think is
relevant for these as I explained it.
THE COURT: Anything else from the State?
ATTORNEY GAHN: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Based on that, uh,
testimony, um, I think it's summarized, is that her
inability to participate in the case was based on a
directive from the County Executive at the time and
the Manitowoc County Corporation Counsel. If memory
serves me right, may have been involved in the
initial decision to turn investigation over to
Calumet County, but I'm not -- I don't trust my
memory anymore. I know the district attorney was
there. I don't remember if the corporation counsel
was involved or not.
Uh, but at any rate, whether they made
the right decision or the wrong decision, uh, it
seems to me it was based on the effort of some
higher officials in Manitowoc County not to
create or further, if you will, from the defense
perspective, the appearance of a -- of a, uh,
conflict of interest. And, um, I -- I don't
perceive how pulling a Manitowoc County person
off would somehow add to any bias on any part
when the purpose for making the decision was to
avoid the creation of bias.
And whether that's right or wrong, the
probative value of that decision, uh, is so
minimal to the facts in this case, which is a
criminal case, uh, that I don't believe the
evidence has much probative value. Um, and for
that reason the Court is not going to allow it.
I believe it would tend to confuse the issues in
this case. Uh, and Mr. Strang's objection is
noted on the record and his offer of proof.
ATTORNEY STRANG: Right. It's -- it's
bias. It's a double standard that's employed, in
our view by, um, uh, the people running
investigation, including those who testified as
witnesses here, or were involved in it.
THE COURT: All right. I think we
should, um, bring the jury in and tell them
they're going to be excused for the day and then
we'll resume tomorrow morning.
ATTORNEY STRANG: Very well.
THE COURT: Bring the jurors in at this
time.
(Jurors in at 4:29 p.m.)
THE COURT: You may be seated. Uh, members
of the jury, it's 4:30, so we're going to conclude
our proceedings for today. Uh, I will remind you,
uh, again, when you go home, don't discuss the case
with anyone, don't discussed it among your --
discuss it among yourselves, and be sure not to, uh,
expose yourself to any media accounts about the
case. We will see you tomorrow morning, uh, at the
normal time.